Harmony Central Forums
No announcement yet.

SDOTD Peavey Revalver be arriving soon- wut now?


  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • SDOTD Peavey Revalver be arriving soon- wut now?

    I've always been an amp/mic kinda recording. Speakers, room acoustics-- AIR-.... but the SDOTD price was just too stupid to NOT give it a try. I've got Cubase- so hopefully compatible. Never used any guitar software before- so it's all news to me.

    I expect to be able to lay down some demo-type stuff, and also learn a little more about guitar amp software. Not really expecting to have really cool tones.


    Offer any advice or suggestions for this newbie?

  • #2

    Haven't tried the revalver in a long time. I had an original demo version and tried it out and found I had no use for it. I have Guitar rig 3 on my system that came with Sonar and again, I tried it out, saw how much CPU power it required and found it highly unstable on my system. I haven't touched it since.

    Whether you'll find it useful depends on your workflow and how you record your tracks. For my band recordings its not much different than a live recording with some additional missing tracks added or vocals rerecorded.

    For solo recordings and writing music to tracks, I usually track rhythm guitar to the drums, add bass, then vocals and leads last. I sometimes do leads before vocals, but having vocals first builds the verse, chorus, bridges in so they are easily identified when adding leads. It also helps to avoid playing leads over the vocal parts.

    My computer processor is only a dual core setup. Its sufficient to mix anything I need. If I try to run an amp simulation program in real time and listen to the processed signal I hear the latency when I play. I can adjust the latency down to 100us which is about as fast as my computer can possibly run and track with an amp sim program but I can only run maybe one effect without the program crashing. If I wanted to run a head, a cab and some effects, I'd have to run the latency much higher which causes a greater delay between the note being struck and the sound I hear.

    So for me, running an amp sim program or plugin within the daw tracking, is not a wise choice. That latency delay makes it impossible for me to time my playing to the beat properly and I can forget about playing ultra fast leads like 32/64th notes in time with a quick beat.

    I can use the program to process a track that's already been recorded. I usually set my latency high so I can run all the plugins I want without crashing the DAW. The delay doesn't matter because I monitor the unprocessed signal tracking and the new track is synced to the old tracks without delay so its just like jamming to a band when I track. If I record a dry guitar I can run the high CPU consumption plugins without worry of the system crashing and add any kind of drive, cab or effects I need to make the guitar sound like it was tracked with a guitar amp and mic.

    I've done this a few times where I track a driven guitar amp and a direct clean signal, then gone back and made the dry track sound like a miced amp. I can say, it was a major pain in the ass though. The first thing was taming the clean guitars attack so it didn't spike the meters. I had to use a comp/limiter to get the track so the clean parts were loud enough to produce a steady saturation and sustain and limit the peaks so they didn't spike the gains into total noise. From there it was fairly easy to add a consistent drive to the track, EQ it and add any effects I wanted.  

    In my case I only used the drive/cab part of the program. I found the effects and EQ unsatisfactory for getting a realistic mix. All the other parts were live so matching a real sound took a whole lot of effort. If I had it to do over I wouldn't have bothered with the dry track and just used two mics on the cab.

    I realize someone who may be just getting into recording may believe the hype a software manufacturer advertises about their plugins. Many believe software is the bridge to getting good recording quality and a short cut substitute that can bypass the need to learn the trade from the ground up. I came from it the other way around and learned the trade the hard way dating back to the late 60's and all these plugins are new to the trade. I have the benefit of having worked as an electronic tech and have been involved in computers since 1980 on my day job so I deal with cutting edge advancements on a daily basis in business.  

    What the result has been from this technology is a the skill that provided the framework the software was built upon, has greatly diminished and as older people retire, the knowledge they held also disappears. You have entire companies run off of software models and the people who use the software don't understand the older manual model the software replaced. They get stuck in a small cube interacting with only their small job responsibility and have no idea what the grand business plan involves. 

    Its a shame because so much knowledge is hidden from them because they don't understand what built the virtual model. If you learn the manual build, then use the virtual you can wield its power properly. If you go at it without the experience of doing it the old fashioned way, you're probably only going to skim the surface and get poor results. Virtual tools can substitute for real gear but they are only effective for people who have used the real deal first and have that experience to drive their use of the virtual to get the best results. 


    • Steve2112
      Steve2112 commented
      Editing a comment

      Wow...that seemed more like a copuy and paste rant....but...thank you very much for the reply.


      Just in case anyone else stops in...my first impressions of Peavey {tag} Revalver [tag] Review [tag]   :

      Set up was okay. I wish these companies (Peavey, Cubase) would make registration a little easier. You get a number with the CD, have to register YOURSELF with the company. You then register your CD number to GET a number- you get some jumbo about how many re-registers you can do- feed the new number back into the program. Come on.

      The Peavey Ravalver isn't as intuitive as I thought it would be. It's hard at first to find what you have to do to get a rig up. You should be able to just grab a rig and go, but you have to go through several selection modes. A few of the presets were promising, but playing around with sub-menus proved fruitful. There's no easy drag and drop- for example if you want to move a pedal or rackmount in the sequence, it seems you have to remove and add. All selection files have to be done from a tiny drop down menu- actually two per device, as you select from a menu you have to select another option from a second menu.

      I really think PEavey could have done a better job of displaying the options. I'm not a lIne 6 fan- but their POD (HD500) software is pretty easy to set up a basic/medium rig.

      As for the sounds, as you can imagine- many fall flat and lifeless. A few simple and global tricks can help breathe life into them- maybe not as good as playing an amp- but almost as good as HEARING an amp- if you get me.

      It's actually just as I suspected/expected. It's a cool toy that may have some legit recording usages- with adpetness and care. But- even a real amp needs that for good recorded tone. right?

      Now I just have to figure out how to record it. :smileyembarrassed: